THE CANONICAL STRUCTURE, THE ACT OF CHURCH AND THE ECCLESIOLOGICAL INTERPRETATION OF SYNODALITY IN THE PATRIARCHATE OF JERUSALEM Dear President, Professor and respected participants, it is with great pleasure that I have come to this Conference, transmitting the wishes and blessings of beatitude the Patriarch of Jerusalem and all Palestine Theophilos the Third, to the works of our Conference be prospered and crowned with success for the glorification of the triune God. I would like to thank Ms. President and all members of the coordinating Committee for the courteous reception and generous hospitality. It is a common finding that after the completion of second Vatican Synod, the relations between the Orthodox and the Roman Catholic Church ʺhave been in‐ troduced in a totally new eraʺ. My short speech will follow the series of specific questions, which were allotted by the Organizing Committee. 1) The historical evolution of the practice of Synodality. In fact, the whole ecclesiastical Synodality of Christianity begins historically from the Synod of Jerusalem (49 AD). Nevertheless, the continuity and func‐ tioning not only of Synodality but also that of the sameness of existence of the Patriarchate of Jerusalem can be interpreted only as a miracle, if we take into account the continuous (direct or indirect) invectives and persecutions, that it has suffered over the centuries, particularly by Arabs and Ottomans. The 4th Ecumenical Synod (451) uplifted the Church of Jerusalem to a Patri‐ archate. With the conquest of the Holy land by Ottomans, the pious and right‐ eous caliph, Omar ibn al Khattab, a companion of Muhammad, with a special Decree (638 AD) bestowed the property of ethnarch and the spiritual leader of all of the Palestine’s Christians to the Patriarch Sofronios of “Royal nation” (that is of Rums). With the Crusades, the Latin Church was imposed forcibly on the Orthodox Clergy. Indeed, the Crusaders, wanting to gain over Armenians and Jacobites, ceded them churches and monasteries1. The current existing and operating synodical system of the Jerusalem Patri‐ archate, without leaving from the basic structures of catholic Synodality of Ecu‐ menical Synods, is based on the Law of Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Jerusa‐ lem (1958), which has been legalized by the Government of Jordan. The State of Jordan is the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the Patriarchate of Je‐ rusalem, according to the 4th Ecumenical Synod (one thousand Orthodox peo‐ ple numbered there today). By the 7th century AD, the Patriarchate was in the possession of the Ottomans, governed by the law of 1875, which was canceled 1 by the Depositary Government of England, which in 1948 gave the Jerusalem to Israel. The law of 1958, which is a law of Jordan (but not of Israel, for the last acknowledges just posterior the elected Patriarch), drafted by the Patriarch Benedict, when Jordan still held Jerusalem. In 1967, Israel occupied regions of Jordan including Jerusalem. The Holy Synod of the Patriarchate of Jerusalem (composed of eighteen members) consists of a) the Patriarch as President, b) Metropolitans, c) titular Bishops (which the Patriarch selects), and d) Archimandrites (deans) which are appointed by a Patriarch. 2) The application of regulations. Synods of the Patriarchate of Jerusalem are convened often by the Patriarch (every Monday and Thursday every week in addition to contingency meetings) and with the required at least two thirds of the possible number of eighteen members. Bishops are expressed freely and operate a direct communication among each other, since all of them live as monks inside the same patriarchal area. All decisions which are taken either unanimously or by the majority are implemented. 3) How do the life of the Church and the Synodal act inspire each other? How is a local church represented in the Synod? How is the program agenda de‐ termined? What are the righteous statuses and the binding nature of its de‐ cisions? Do other Christian communities of the region involve in the synod‐ ical consultations? In the Patriarchate of Jerusalem, the Holy Synod includes, a part of the bishops, and the Abbots (Archimandrites), since it functions as a Greek‐Orthodox Mon‐ astery (Holy Common or Commonwealth of Holy Sepulcher) or the Holy Sep‐ ulcher Brotherhood. Parochial Local Councils, which are composed of laymen, are represented indirectly in the Holy Synod by the bishops or Archiman‐ drites/Abbots of their territories and directly to the election of a Patriarch. The Patriarch convenes the Holy Synod and sets the agenda by Archbishop Supreme Secretary. As known, the decisions of an Ecumenical Synod are bound on the canonical status of all of the Churches. Granting to the 7th Ecumenical Synod, the legal position of a Synod stems from its correspondence with the former. But, for local Synods or local councils, their decisions are not bound with the whole climate of every Patriarchate. For this reason, and other Christian communities of the region are not involved or affected by the synodical consultations (nei‐ ther outsiders nor as observers). 2 4) Are there contemporary theological interpretations of Synodality in the Patriarchate of Jerusalem? Are there some theological or officially canonical texts, which could be of interest of others apart from the Patriarchate of Jeru‐ salem? Officially, there are no other contemporary theological interpretations of Syn‐ odality in the Patriarchate of Jerusalem, because the law of 1948 is applied as a status quo, as a result of difficult political equilibria of the region. However, after these consultations and decisions among all the members concerned, we might develop further in the future the so‐called “Presidency of manyʺ, according to Saint John Chrysostom2, always in the spirit of catholic consciousness of the Church, i.e. the assent of the ʺpeople of Godʺ (see Newsletter of Patriarchs of 1848)3, and the non‐abuse of an institutionalized and bureaucratic Synodality, according to Saint Gregory the Theologian. Because, in such a case, the Synod will become an institution (as a secular magnitude) above the local Churches (vid. Konziliarismum). 5) Do the relations between Church and state influence the work of the Synod? Historically, the sacred Rules of Ecumenical Synods influenced, slowly but surely, the ethos, political legislation and in general the cultural psychology of people. This could happen, especially in the old era, when the Byzantine Em‐ pire was uniform and ecumenical. Today, due to multiculturalism and global‐ ization, as well as the existence of individual States, the decisions of an Ecu‐ menical Synod of the Christian Church shrink. In accordance with the 1958 Law, the Patriarch of Jerusalem represents the Orthodox Community in each Government in all cases, primarily of Jordan4. On the other hand, of course, always, according to Church history, each time the State affects the Church indirectly, impliedly and implicitly, and conse‐ quently the decisions of Her Synods, although not in terms of fundamental dogmas. Problems spring up constantly in the Jerusalem Patriarchate either from other Christian denominations as to certain rights on sacred sites and his‐ torical monuments, or from global or nationalistic aspirations or geopolitical circumstances. If certain political and psychological considerations are ever removed, which in this life cannot be eliminated completely, but, at least, be reduced, I think that we can reach the early Christian loving unity. 6) What is the role of Synodality beyond the level of the local Church? The Synodality, according to the Orthodox East self‐consciousness, is identified with the Church5. In other words, the Church already from the beginning of its 3 constitution is a ʺSynodal societyʺ; this is due to catholicity, i.e. qualitative and not just geographic ecumenicity, of the latter. The synodical Primus (Πρώτος), in an administrative sense, who is defined by the size of the geographical area that he pastures, does not identify with the considered by Christ to be “first”, i.e. the socially, economically and politically minimum, faint, powerless, petty, least or small. One should not use the honorary primacy in terms of exploita‐ tion or to pervert it to managerial or executive one, since all the bishops bear the same degree of the priesthood. Although Synodality ontologically should not, in accordance with the Or‐ thodox Patristic self‐consciousness, be understood as communication only of Bishops of local Churches, but as a communion of all of the members of the One Holy Catholic Church, in practice, Synodality of the Church of Jerusalem as all of the individual Churches, works mainly through the Churches espe‐ cially via Patriarchs and Archbishops or their representatives6. 7) How does the responsibility of Primus appear in practice and theology of Synodality? On this question it is enough, I think, to mention only two historical examples: a) the deposition of Patriarchʹs Cyril the Second by the Synod of Holy Sepulcher Brotherhood (1872), because this Patriarch has not condemned the Bulgarian Schism and the ethnic‐scholasticism of pan‐Slavism, and b) the deposition of Patriarch Irenaeus (6/5/2005). Although the honorary7 role (even if some Orthodox people do not embrace the ʺnull valueʺ) of the Primus, i.e. the Patriarch, is lifelong and compelling8, the Holy Synod (with the two thirty of members of the Synod and with the two thirty of married priests) may cease him, if he is indifferent as to the Orthodox doctrines9 or suffering from physical or mental illness. Likewise, the rights of the Primus are limited by the Mixed Council as well as by the Parochial Local Councils. The Mixed Council consists of the Patriarch, five Jordanians clergy that are appointed by the Holy Synod, eight laymen Jordanians who Orthodox people of Jordan elect, and a laic Vice President, who the lay members elect. The Paro‐ chial Local Councils recommended by the Patriarch for the financial manage‐ ment of each local Church.